Renault Clio 2009 vs Volkswagen Golf 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
| Renault Clio engine produces 5 HP less power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Volkswagen Golf. Despite less power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Twingo, Renault Modus | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Golf might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Golf engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Volkswagen Golf 2010 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.23 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Renault Clio is smaller, but slightly higher. Renault Clio is 31 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Golf, 7 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 439 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1495 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage space. Renault Clio has 66 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`608 | 1`890 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |